PM wants fewer jobless foreign nationals on benefits as first-time data released
The figures, published by the Department for Work and Pensions on Tuesday, show the number of British and Irish nationals not in work and claiming universal credit (UC) has also risen over the same 12-month period.
There were 4.3 million people in the Common Travel Area category – made up of people who live or work in the UK without any immigration restrictions – on UC in May.
This rose from 3.5 million in May last year and was almost double the 2.8 million such claimants in May 2022, which is the earliest month for which data is available.
In total there were 7.9 million people on UC – a payment to help with living costs and available for people on low incomes or those who are out of work or cannot work – in June.
The vast majority – 6.6 million or (83.6%) – were British and Irish nationals and those who live or work in the UK without any immigration restrictions.
Just over a third (34% or 2.7 million) of all those on UC were in work as of May.
The figures showed that the total number of UC claimants who are refugees, have EU settled status, arrived under a humanitarian route or have either limited or indefinite leave to remain in the UK has risen year-on-year, from 1.1 million in June 2024 to 1.2 million last month.
The numbers in these categories on UC and out of work have also risen steadily over the past three years, with the Conservatives saying they have a 'clear, common-sense position' that the benefit 'should be reserved for UK citizens only'.
The Government said it had 'inherited a broken welfare system and spiralling, unsustainable benefits bill' and was working on reforms including tightening rules on who can claim.
The Prime Minister's spokesman said they will double the amount of time it takes to apply for settled status from five years to 10, limiting eligibility for the benefit.
Asked whether Sir Keir wants to see the number of foreign nationals claiming benefits while unemployed reduced, his official spokesman said: 'Absolutely, we both want to see the overall numbers of immigration reduced and we've set out plans for that through the Immigration White Paper.
'Within that, we also want to see people making a contribution to the UK, and that's why in the White Paper we set out that we will be doubling the amount of time it takes to apply for settled status.
'That actually means that typically you can only access universal credit after you've lived here currently for five years, and we're doubling that to a starting point of 10 years, so that will obviously reduce those numbers.'
The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) said it had published the statistics 'following a public commitment to investigate and develop breakdowns of the UC caseload by the immigration status of foreign nationals in receipt of UC'.
People with EU Settlement Scheme settled status who have a right to reside in the UK were the second largest group on UC, accounting for 9.7% (770,379), while 2.7% (211,090) of the total had indefinite leave to remain in the UK.
Refugees accounted for 1.5% (118,749) of people on UC, while 0.7% (54,156) were people who had come by safe and legal humanitarian routes including under the Ukraine and Afghan resettlement schemes.
Shadow home secretary Chris Philp said only UK citizens should be able to access universal credit (Lucy North/PA)
A total of 75,267 people, making up 1% of the total on UC, had limited leave to remain in the UK, covering those with temporary immigration status.
The rest – some 65,346 people – were either no longer receiving UC payments or had no immigration status recorded on digital systems, the DWP said.
People can access UC only if they have an immigration status that provides recourse to public funds.
Those with no recourse to public funds (NRPF) cannot claim most benefits, tax credits or housing assistance that are paid by the state.
Asylum seekers do not have access to UC as they have NRPF but those granted refugee status – deemed to have been forced to flee their country because of a well-founded fear of persecution, war or violence – can claim the benefit.
While refugees on UC had the lowest rate of employment at 22%, the department said those who have only recently been granted refugee status cannot be in employment at that point as asylum seekers are not permitted to work.
Independent MP Rupert Lowe, an ex-member of Reform UK, had welcomed the pledge to publish the data, describing it as a 'huge win' for those who had 'relentlessly pushed for this'.
He described the numbers as 'absolute insanity', posting on X: 'We cannot afford it. The country is BROKE.'
Shadow home secretary Chris Philp branded the figures 'staggering' and claimed they are 'clear proof that the Labour government has lost control of our welfare system'.
He said: 'Under Kemi Badenoch, we've set out a clear, common-sense position. Universal credit should be reserved for UK citizens only. This is about fairness, responsibility and protecting support for those who've contributed to this country.'
But the Government said the proportion of UC payments 'to foreign nationals has already fallen since last July'.
While the numbers of claimants who are refugees, have EU settled status, arrived under a humanitarian route or have either limited or indefinite leave to remain in the UK have risen year-on-year, the proportion has fallen.
These categories account for 15.6% of the total UC claimants in June, down from 16.5% a year earlier when the Conservatives were still in government.
The number of British and Irish nationals and those who live or work in the UK without any immigration restrictions – covering those in the Common Travel Area (CTA) – rose by almost a million from 5.6 million in June last year to 6.6 million last month.
The proportion also rose slightly from 82.5% to 83.6%.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Spectator
19 minutes ago
- Spectator
Tories end their term on a high
Labour woes mean Tory smiles. The Conservatives have ended the parliamentary session on a (reasonable) high, after last week's benefits debacle. At the shadow cabinet yesterday, frontbenchers were treated to a presentation by Mark McInnes, the new chief executive, and Paul Bristow – the only real success story from May's local elections. This evening, it was the turn of Kemi Badenoch to address the 1922 Committee for their final meeting before the summer recess. Badenoch's speech was an upbeat affair. She pointed to the U-turns secured on welfare, grooming gangs and winter fuel. Progress was highlighted in a number of key areas, after the shambles of the last election. Following the betting scandal, the Tories have now rebuilt their candidates' team. Social media has been overhauled; a new external agency has been brought to offer advice. There was much talk of the importance of principles unlike the (implicitly) populist Reform. Little reference was made to the recent local elections, in which the party won 15 per cent of the vote. The Tory leader also used her speech to set out a plan for the next three months. She urged attendees to return to their constituencies this summer, to get their name out there and ensure that Nigel Farage does not dominate the airwaves. Then there will be conference, when the party's new stance on membership of the ECHR will be revealed. Badenoch told MPs a variation of the same formulation she has used many times previously. She is prepared to leave the ECHR if it is deemed necessary. But, she stressed, it will not act as a magic bullet for any of Britain's current woes. She noted too that the last time the Tories were in opposition, the 1998 conference was a much more gloomy than 1997, owing to the distraction of the leadership contest. Badenoch told her MPs that she wanted to see all 120 of them in Birmingham this October. Around 70 had piled in today to Committee Room 14 to hear her speech. Thirty seconds of applause greeted her arrival, while questions were a mix of fawning and politeness. James Cleverly fulsomely praised Kemi Badenoch's leadership while Edward Leigh inquired about Lord Wolfson's role in deciding the ECHR policy. Afterwards, it was back to the shadow cabinet room for farewell summer drinks. A positive, if slightly pedestrian, end to a long term. After a tricky 12 months for the Tories, that is no bad thing.
The Independent
19 minutes ago
- The Independent
Starmer's fury over Afghan data breach as he warns Tories ‘have questions to answer'
Keir Starmer has vented his fury over the cover-up of the catastrophic data breach that risked the lives of up to 100,000 Afghans, as it emerged no one had faced action over the huge blunder. The prime minister said the leak should never have happened and that Tory ministers have 'serious questions to answer', a day after an unprecedented superinjunction was lifted. Ben Wallace, who was defence secretary at the time the draconian legal order was granted, earlier said he took full responsibility for the leak, which happened when an MoD official released a spreadsheet containing the names of 18,000 Afghans "in error". But questions have been raised over why no one has been fired over the breach, which put the lives of those with links to UK forces in danger of reprisals from the Taliban, amid calls for further investigation. It comes as the chair of a powerful Commons committee has written to the Information Commissioner, applying pressure for a rethink on its decision not to investigate the breach, which cost the taxpayer billions in relocating thousands of affected Afghans to the UK. At the start of a tense Prime Minister's Questions, Sir Keir expressed his anger, telling MPs: "We warned in opposition about Conservative management of this policy and yesterday, the defence secretary set out the full extent of the failings that we inherited: a major data breach, a super injunction, a secret route that has already cost hundreds of millions of pounds. "Ministers who served under the party opposite have serious questions to answer about how this was ever allowed to happen." He suggested the Conservatives should "welcome" scrutiny from the Commons Defence Committee, which has vowed to investigate. In a dramatic intervention just hours later, right-wing former home secretary Suella Braverman revealed that there were splits in the Tory government over how to deal with the breach and said she had opposed the superinjunction and the new secret route set up to bring those affected to the UK. In a scathing statement, Ms Braverman condemned the former Tory government, then led by Rishi Sunak, in which she played a major role before she was sacked by the former prime minister. She said: 'There is much more that needs to be said about the conduct of the MoD, both ministers and officials, and the House of Commons is the right place to do so. I hope we have the opportunity soon. 'What has happened is outrageous and must never happen again. We must therefore be very clear about what that was and how it happened. 'The cover-up was wrong, the super injunction was wrong, and the failure to stop unwanted mass immigration has been unforgivable. So, I am sorry: the Conservative government failed you and its leaders let you down. It wasn't good enough then. It's not good enough now.' Mr Sunak, ex-defence secretary Grant Shapps and former armed forces minister James Heappey, who oversaw the cover-up, have all been contacted for comment, but none have broken cover and have all remained silent on the breach. Amid calls for further investigation into the breach, Defence Secretary John Healey said that 'accountability starts now' after admitting that he was uncomfortable with the way that the information had been covered up for three years. The Commons Defence Committee confirmed it would launch its own inquiry, and Dame Chi Onwurah, chair of the Commons committee for science innovation and technology, is writing to the Information Commissioner pushing for an investigation. The Information Commissioner has so far declined to hold its own probe, despite previously issuing a fine of £305,000 for a much smaller MoD data breach. Dame Chi told The Independent: 'A leak of this magnitude is, of course, extremely worrying and the fact that it happened in the Ministry of Defence brings the additional dimension of security concerns. The Defence Select Committee Office (ICO) will be undertaking a full inquiry, in the meantime I will be writing to the Information Commissioner to ask for more details on his office's role in this case.' Jon Baines, a senior data protection specialist at Mishcon de Reya, expressed bafflement at the commissioner's attitude to the breach. He said: 'I have not seen such unanimous bafflement from the data protection commentariat at the ICO's lack of apparent interest. 'There is a potential argument that there is no point in a big fine against the MoD when it would punish the public purse. 'Enforcement is not just about fines. The information commissioner has the power to lay a report before parliament. I have been banging on for years about the issue of hidden data in spreadsheets, and if I were the commissioner, I would be thinking about how I can raise the issue. 'A report before parliament would give them publicity, raise the issue and seize parliament.' The ICO has not responded to The Independent 's request for comment. Meanwhile, a member of the defence select committee has warned against naming and shaming the individual responsible for the breach and said the committee should instead look at a failure of government. Confirming the committee would launch an inquiry, its chair, Labour MP Tan Dhesi, told BBC Radio 4's The World at One Programme: "We want to get to the bottom of what has happened on behalf of parliament, which has been sidelined for too long on this issue.' "Ultimately, I think the fact there has been no parliamentary scrutiny, that nobody's been held to account on this, is just not on at all." Leyton and Wanstead Labour MP Calvin Bailey, who was a key figure in organising flights out of Kabul when allied forces went into a chaotic retreat as the Taliban swept to power in 2021, called for 'proper scrutiny' on the matter. He said: 'We need to go back and give proper scrutiny to everything, not just the data breach, the whole culture management and oversight of the operation, of the extraction recovery, the foreign policy and the military engagement and involvement. 'We will probably find that people were working under duress and pressure, because there were too few people to deal with the crisis.' He also warned that the defence committee was 'best placed to do the necessary work' as a full public inquiry 'would take too long and be too expensive'.
Telegraph
20 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Talking freely about Islam ‘feared more than any other religion'
People are more fearful of speaking freely about Islam than any other religion, a survey has found. Almost twice as many adults feel they have to hold back on expressing their views about the faith as they do for Christianity, according to research by the Commission for Countering Extremism (CCE), which advises the Government. The study, to be published on Thursday, also found that Islam was the only religion which more people felt was protected 'too much' rather than 'too little'. A quarter of those who held back on speaking out on religious topics said they did so because of fears about their safety. Some 46 per cent said they had done so to avoid causing offence or starting an argument. The study, based on interviews with 2,500 people, was conducted by Ipsos UK for the CCE.
